Car Glass Rules Could Impair Cell, GPS and Radio Signals In CA

An anonymous reader writes "The California Air Resources Board (CARB) just passed a new regulation that requires glazed glass in automobiles that is supposed to reduce the need to use air conditioning. The catch is that the same properties that block electromagnetic sunlight radiation also block lower frequency electromagnetic radio waves. That means radios, satellite radios, GPS, garage door openers, and cell phones will be severely degraded. Even more surprising is that it requires this glass even for jeeps that have soft covers, plastic windows, and no air conditioning.'"

Comments

! surprising

[DoofusOfDeath]

Even more surprising is that it requires this glass even for jeeps that have soft covers, plastic windows, and no air conditioning.'"

You must be new to bureaucracies.

Re:! surprising

[Zcar]

Or to California. Really. Expecting something to come out of the California government to make sense?

Re:! surprising

[EraserMouseMan]

or government in general...

Seriously, does anybody really think that government is made up of the country's smartest people? That being said, why do some people think it's a great idea vote people into office who will tax us to come up with these half-witted "solutions" that don't even make any noticeable difference?

Re:! surprising

[Korin43]

Because the evil idiots in government are better than the evil idiots who run scary corporations! *ignore the fact that they are the same people*

Re:! surprising

[thepooh81]

I used to live in Phoenix, Arizona. There's no feasible amount of tint or blocking the sunlight that's going to stop those poor bastards that lack AC from rolling the windows down in the summer. Keeping the windows might have hot air blowing in your face but it's stopping the air in your car from turning into an oven.

It can honestly get up to 150 degrees in a car with the windows rolled up very fast (15 minutes). I would see stories all the time about people that were new to the area leaving their dogs (or lord forbid their kids) in the car only to come out to find their loved one needing to go to the emergency room or dead.

Granted this is about CA but there are plenty of areas that get really hot in CA as well (some even more-so)

Re:! surprising

[cabjf]

At least there's a benefit for shareholders in the scary corporation scenario.

Re:! surprising

[camperdave]

Like someone once said: If a person wishes to rule, that person should in no way be given any power.

Re:! surprising

[Toonol]

A sheriff isn't beholden to enforce federal law. He's a local official; he also is the highest law enforcement official in his domain. He very well could get you in trouble, but it depends on his judgment.

Re:! surprising

[Toonol]

Right. This proves that government would be the solution if we had absolutely superhuman, omniscient lawmakers. When that happens, I'll gladly support them. Until then, the less power they have, the better.

Re:! surprising

[UltraAyla]

yes, because roads, schools, and police aren't beneficial at all. grow up.

Re:! surprising

[Anonymous Coward]

I see your burglary and raise you an armed robbery.

I was robbed at gunpoint several years ago. Within 15 seconds of the asshole leaving, I called 911 and was immediately connected to a 911 operator. Within 90 seconds there was a police officer on the scene. Within 3 minutes the place was swarming with cops. Within 6 minutes the asshole was sitting in the back of a car in handcuffs. Did I mention this was in the middle of a snowstorm. With 10 inches already on the ground?

Having said that I have been harassed by the police on multiple occasions because I looked like someone who might have drugs on them.

People are people, and they will always act like people, even if we give them special titles like Police Officer. Just don't confuse people being people with THE GUBBERMINT IS INCOMPETENT, because only people can be incompetent.

Re:! surprising

[Z34107]

yes, because roads, schools, and police aren't beneficial at all. grow up.

Hmmmm? Why is "OMG ROADS" the grown-up response to "Government in general does a lot of terrible, wasteful things?"

At the Federal level, very little goes to roads, schools, and police. At the local level (at least where I live) those are the first things cut because cutting them scares up support for new taxes.

So, yes, roads, schools, and police are beneficial. Nobody said that they weren't, and that doesn't explain how anything coming out of California makes a lick of sense.

Re:! surprising

[BitZtream]

omfg the man is totally out to get you dude.

Heres a hint: If you were robbed and the total loss was $50, I'm going to be fucking pissed if they spend $15k investigating it using my tax dollars rather than doing more important things.

How do you know the prints were bigger? Seems to me like they'd have to look all over the house and dust for them for you to know they were bigger. Of course, the reality of it is they were probably a friends, and the cops really only need to check specific places, where the criminals come in.

They don't dust your piano for prints when they check the glass on the broken window glass and find them there.

I too have been a victim, while I thought the cop and detectives that investigated were being very lax, after talking with them about what they were doing it became clear real quick that they had a good 20 years EACH more experience than I, and knew where to not waste time doing stupid shit. They caught the guy during one of the times it happened to me, with my help, people are far more likely to talk to a neighbor than a cop, its amazing how much YOU CAN HELP YOURSELF. The other instance resulted in a leather jacket and ~$30 taken from my unlocked car. It would have been a complete waste of time AND money to investigate it, however they are aware of it so if a string of break-ins occur they can work with the pattern.

You can report police who violate traffic laws, of course you'll probably end up reporting an officer that was going to a crime and didn't have his sirens on so he/she didn't alert the person he was coming or a hundred other reasons that you know nothing about since you obviously aren't a cop.

Cops don't investigate ponzi schemes, its not their arena, try the FBI or your SBI instead, those are the people who handle that sort of thing. Again however, I'd rather have them going after real criminal organizations rather than some ponzi scheme taking advantage of idiots like yourself. Truth be told, it probably wasn't a ponzi scheme, judging by the way you are using the word I'm betting you actually don't know what it means.

People who whine like yourself are the kind of people that make the rest of the world think people from California are complete morons who expect someone else to take care of them, sadly, I do think someone else needs to take care of you, at least until you get out of high school.

As the GP said, grow the hell up, the man isn't out to get you.

You mean ...

[bryanp]

... people will have problems using cell phones while driving?

Oh darn. That's just horrible.

Re:You mean ...

[El Gigante de Justic]

Unfortunately, instead of meaning people will stop using their phone, they'll probably just fumble around with it more instead to restart their calls.

    Or they'll resort to texting which (supposedly) doesn't require as strong of a signal as voice calls.

Re:You mean ...

[dwillden]

Also, I don't know about you, but I like to listen to the radio while driving.

Every car radio I have ever seen had an EXTERNAL antanna.

Re:You mean ...

[Duradin]

Or they'll just plug into an external cell antenna.

Re:You mean ...

[BobMcD]

OR they'll roll down the window to make the call, heating up the car in the process, then run the AC on full blast to level it out afterwards.

Who owns the patents?

[danking]

My question is, who owns the rights to this technology they are going to enforce everyone to have?

CARB, necessary evil

[drinkypoo]

The CARB should be barred from mandating equipment, and simply mandate emissions standards. Who cares why your car gets good or shitty mileage? Let's just see them have mandated emissions and, if necessary, mileage; we already have both, of course. But at the same time, the CARB has done amazing things for California's air quality; there's more Chinese pollution in LA now than the local stuff. Which highlights the NEXT phase of the problem... but we're not done here, yet.

Re:CARB, necessary evil

[hol]

But should be up to the customer.

If you want something that gets 10 mpg, go ahead and buy it. Just don't come looking to me for a handout when you can no longer afford the gas. Yep, history spoke against me last year, yep, were 70,000 dollar Hummer drivers got their handouts.

Same with a 50 mpg car. Who cares how it gets there, as long as it meets all emission regulations and safety standards. When people who know nothing about automobile technology mandate what needs to be used, they'll be no better off than the software industry - beholden to marketing, lobbying and politics, and ... never mind

Re:CARB, necessary evil

[mustafap]

>But should be up to the customer.

No. It should be up to society. Some people are just too thick at act responsibly. And car manufacturers are hardly going to build cars for 'a few stupid idiots' - they will design a car and market it hard, and try to sell as many as possible. Regulating will take away the option to make cars suitable for the dumb.

Re:CARB, necessary evil

[RobotRunAmok]

No. It should be up to society

No. It should be up to the customer. The alternative breeds what we call a "Nanny State." That's a Bad Thing.

Re:CARB, necessary evil

[lennier]

"what we call a "Nanny State." That's a Bad Thing."

Why? A political catchphrase is not an argument, nor is it a description of an actually-existing thing. It's just a shout with no verbal content.

Think about this: real nannies exist for a reason. Real states also exist for a reason. There are certain situations where people collectively come to the decision that they don't *want* to tolerate certain types of destructive behaviour, because they cost us all. Any healthy group does this, because normal healthy humans are social creatures. We *like* to modify our behaviour so that it doesn't have stupid outcomes for the group. We call this "learning to socialise". The only people who think that a human must be an absolutely self-sufficient, take-nothing, give-nothing, hardcore screw-my-neighbour loner, are psychologically damaged individuals who haven't learned how to live with others.

It's one thing that such a syndrome exists. It's another that this psychological dysfunction has become a hugely powerful political movement. We don't need to bow down to this false idea of the heroic egotist fighting the mass of zombie sheeple trying to crush his freedom. Instead, look at each case on its merits and realise that collective problems do exist, society is not a bad thing, and that centralised responses sometimes are the right response and sometimes aren't.

So instead of just throwing a content-free slogan around, how about arguing why in *this* specific case, *this* kind of regulation is the wrong response to a serious societal problem?

Fuel Economy

[NinjaPablo]

So to reduce fuel consumption, they're enacting a law that is going to force people to roll down their windows to get cell, radio and GPS signals, therefore increasing drag and fuel consumption? Yay!

I must be an idiot

[kenp2002]

I must be an idiot but my radio antenna is outside my car connected with a cable to my radio. Why would glazed glass be an issue. not only that but unless your car is made of plastic isn't the frame of the car in fact a passive antenna since it isn't grounded? (I could be wrong here, too many years since school). Feel free to correct me but since the windows are not contigious isn't this an issue of weaker cell phone signals and with more states passive anti-cell phone while driving laws isn't this a moot issue?

I must be old and cranky or just plain stupid but how is this a bad idea? A cooler car, less gas burned in AC, and potential to stop an alien laser weapon long enough to duck before it melts through the glass seems like a good idea. While we are at it can we require bulletproof glass to boot in the wind shield and rear windows since they always seem to get shot up in the movies but no one ever takes a shot from the side...

I guess this article had its intended effect...

[divisionbyzero]

It has everyone complaining about the stoopid government but did you notice that this was printed in a Detroit newspaper? Gee, I wonder why people in Detroit would care about a new type of glass in a car window that adds extra cost to a vehicle? You just got played due to your knee-jerk anti-government attitude. Regardless of whether you agree with the manufacturers or the government you should realize when you are being manipulated by the media.

Re:Welcome to California...

[NoYob]

and CA is a prime example of why voter control of taxation and spending is a horrible idea.

More spending: they vote YES.

Raise taxes to pay for that spending: the vote NO

Have a windfall in tax revenues? Got to spend it! Can't save it for future budgetary shortfalls!

California is the most democratic state in the Union and look what happens. There's a reason why we're set up as a Republic.

Surprising

[c]

> Even more surprising is that it requires this glass even
> for jeeps that have soft covers, plastic windows, and
> no air conditioning.

The alternative would be to leave a loophole in a rule intended to be followed by automotive corporations. Historically, that hasn't worked out so well.

c.

Attention People of California

[grasshoppa]

Your government is defective. Huge budget deficits, stealing from local cities and counties and flawed regulations being rammed through the legislative process.

Living here, I vote we rip up the state's constitution and start fresh. The first step is ousting the assholes currently in charge.

Re:If I lived in Cali...

[vijayiyer]

They don't allow you to do that here in California - you can't just bring a 49 state car here. This state is run by egomaniacs who have no concept of finance.
I bet that they didn't even think about whether the cost of the glazed glass pays for the fuel it saves.

California really does feel like a separate country. They place zero value on personal freedom here.

Or any committee

[tjstork]

Seriously, does anybody really think that government is made up of the country's smartest people?

The private sector could easily do something this stupid. It's just that, we have only one government, and in the private sector, stupid businesses are supposed to fail, unless they happen to be banks.

Re:Or any committee

[timeOday]

The private sector could easily do something this stupid.

The private sector is already doing something much more stupid - namely, failing to use this glass for the 99% of car windows for which it makes sense. By comparison, requiring it in the 1% of cases (Jeep windows!) where it's not necessary is a little unfortunate but insignificant.

And they wonder why their economy is in the toilet

[dirkdodgers]

If the state of California believes they need to regulate negative externalities resulting from the operation of internal combustion engines, then they should tax the operation of internal combustion engines across the board.

Instead, we have an authoritarian government telling us what light bulbs we can screw in, what size of televisions we can own, and now the brand of auto glass we use.

What we have here is government singling out specific groups, behaviors, and industries with coercive power in a manner that is anathema to individual liberty.

Economic liberty is a civil liberty.

Re:I've developed a new type of air conditioning

[mcgrew]

So, according to the computer, it's better to use A/C with windows up.

This was too quick and easy for TV, so they decided to stage a seven hour marathon, race-til-you're-empty duel, with Jamie driving an SUV with A/C on and Adam driving an SUV with windows down. Though, once the safety inspector intervened, it was no longer a seven-hour marathon, it was a bit slower (45mph instead of 55mph), and a lot shorter (only 5 gallons each).

Jamie's A/C car ran out of gas first -- Adam's windows down SUV ran for another 30 laps -- completely contradicting the computer mpg estimate. Computer estimate based on air flow into the engine, so it would appear that it is unable to properly model the difference between A/C and windows down.

However, often the mythbusters' methodology is shaky, and from this short synopsis (I haven't seen that episode) this was one of those cases.

At 45 mph you will indeed get better mileage with the windows down (on most cars, YMMV). That's the first methodology fault. The faster you go, the more pronounced the drag. Under 40 you're better with the windows down, over 50 you're better off with them up. Nobody drives 45 on the interstate -- in fact, that's the minimum speed on most highways.

The second is, you have two different drivers with two different driving styles. The one who is able to keep closer to a steady speed is going to get the best mileage. If they had set the cruise control to 70mph and done the test, the computer would have matched the results.